Syria

[Freedom]

This missile strike hit ISIS who the US used to help in Syria.

No, it hit the secular government's buildings and a university.

The Syrian government has been fighting ISIS. Assad has been protecting the Syrian Christian population from Sunni extremists like ISIS.

Ever wonder why ISIS never hit Israeli targets? A dog never bites it's own tail.

[brocktonblockbust]

Russia promised --- and i believe will not fail to ---- retaliate against the usa ............ That is coming in a few hours/days

[walrus]

Maybe this is brilliant. Deep state calling for regime change and intervention, maybe full out war. Trump says I'll handle it, gives Russia a wink and launches a few inconsequential bombings and calls it one and done. Keeps people happy, shuts everyone up, kills Russia narrative, scares North Korea, makes Israel happy and boom you are good. May be absolutely brilliant. 12 dimensional chess

[brocktonblockbust]

Donald Trump is a genius and has outsmarted them all. He has satisfied the War Hawks who in exchange for the bombing have said they will not release any compromising images from the past which would humiliate him and his family. so everyone is satisfied. Also it was a little game between Russia and the United States to see how good the old Soviet surface-to-air missile systems behave against brand new shiny missiles. It looks as if the old Soviet system shut down 71 out of 103.

[Gandalf]

Sargon of Akkad has the best interpretation of the Syrian situation that I have seen. It is very important information and shows you just how twisted our countries are and just how bad the media is. I recommend watching all 3 parts and you won't read the media with the same mindset again.

[walrus]

And furthermore, another thing that is a bit revolting is tomorrow morning when the market opens I can see the defense stocks popping. The big guys will make millions banking on further attacks. That part of the game is a bit disgusting. I would think it's almost sure money for anyone who hits them early but I won't touch it. I will not speculate on the misery of others, same reason I don't touch Monsanto stock. They are in bed with soros to feed everyone gmo and basically copyright the food supply, assholes. Our government is inept, slow and bought to allow Monsanto to do what they do.

[mrbig1]

People who watch Fox news believe it like it's coming out the mouth of Jesus. No matter how ridiculous it may sound they will fall for it hook line and sinker. In fact I don't watch the Zionist news at all.

[walrus]

People who watch Fox news believe it like it's coming out the mouth of Jesus. No matter how ridiculous it may sound they will fall for it hook line and sinker. In fact I don't watch the Zionist news at all.

Don't know if u saw tucker Carlson but he was basically saying why bomb when we still don't know what's going on. They had quite a few guests who opposed the bombing. Granted fox can be bro con but they mix it up sometimes.

[TitoFan]

Sargon of Akkad has the best interpretation of the Syrian situation that I have seen. It is very important information and shows you just how twisted our countries are and just how bad the media is. I recommend watching all 3 parts and you won't read the media with the same mindset again.

Didn't watch all of it, but enough to get the gist.

Obviously there are some things in there that are beyond the realm of feasibility. Tweets of Syrian civilians saying they "love" Trump are to say the least hysterical. A 7-year old Syrian refugee girl reading talking about a conflict that has gone on for 6 years is believable only by other 7-year olds. Nikki Haley is nothing but a parrot with an audience.

That being said, the video speaker is a bit too zealous at times in order to make his point. If you're going to show a graph in what is a poor attempt at proving that Trump is bombing Syria to gain popularity in the States, at least have the professionalism to show the correct dates in the graph. Also, as somewhat knowledgeable of graphs and tendencies, that particular graph does not show a reverse in the negative tendency of the data. There's ups and downs throughout the graph, with the general tendency remaining downward. Stick to politics, and leave the statistics to the experts. Also, in dismissing the USA Today "handy infograph" (new word, I guess) as skewed, saying that there's opposition to the Syrian bombing outside of China, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, and Syria.... the speaker is saying the obvious. But there is an official position by each country which is what the "infograph" is trying to portray. We see Syria's envoy to the UN categorically deny the Syrian use of any chemical weapons, but...... really..... what is he supposed to say. That they're gassing the hell out of civilians and everybody mind their own business?

The comparison to the Iraq WMD affair was pretty good, however. When that was actually happening, I was among those with my eyebrows raised the highest. Maybe it was because Bush was involved and I've always disliked Bush a great deal. But the whole thing stunk from the beginning. You'd think the public would've learned a very good lesson from that one.

There's a bottom line for me on this and it's quite simple.

The term "national security" gets abused used quite often when justifying military actions. If you look for definitions of "national security", you find that the term has evolved from its simple origin meant to define protection from military threats or political coercion threatening a country's borders. The term apparently has been expanded to include justification for military actions abroad, where threats to the aggressor are unclear, muddled, or nonexistent.

All of this is to say that I fail to understand what we're doing in Syria in the first place. Especially given the fact that bombings in Syria have brought in close, direct conflict with Russia..... something I hope we're all against. Whether or not Syria is gassing its own people shouldn't be the business of the U.S., or any other country, for that matter. We can fret over it.... we can criticize it.... we can condemn it. But bombing the country? It's wrong.

[Gandalf]

Sargon of Akkad has the best interpretation of the Syrian situation that I have seen. It is very important information and shows you just how twisted our countries are and just how bad the media is. I recommend watching all 3 parts and you won't read the media with the same mindset again.

Didn't watch all of it, but enough to get the gist.

Obviously there are some things in there that are beyond the realm of feasibility. Tweets of Syrian civilians saying they "love" Trump are to say the least hysterical. A 7-year old Syrian refugee girl reading talking about a conflict that has gone on for 6 years is believable only by other 7-year olds. Nikki Haley is nothing but a parrot with an audience.

That being said, the video speaker is a bit too zealous at times in order to make his point. If you're going to show a graph in what is a poor attempt at proving that Trump is bombing Syria to gain popularity in the States, at least have the professionalism to show the correct dates in the graph. Also, as somewhat knowledgeable of graphs and tendencies, that particular graph does not show a reverse in the negative tendency of the data. There's ups and downs throughout the graph, with the general tendency remaining downward. Stick to politics, and leave the statistics to the experts. Also, in dismissing the USA Today "handy infograph" (new word, I guess) as skewed, saying that there's opposition to the Syrian bombing outside of China, Indonesia, Iran, Russia, and Syria.... the speaker is saying the obvious. But there is an official position by each country which is what the "infograph" is trying to portray. We see Syria's envoy to the UN categorically deny the Syrian use of any chemical weapons, but...... really..... what is he supposed to say. That they're gassing the hell out of civilians and everybody mind their own business?

The comparison to the Iraq WMD affair was pretty good, however. When that was actually happening, I was among those with my eyebrows raised the highest. Maybe it was because Bush was involved and I've always disliked Bush a great deal. But the whole thing stunk from the beginning. You'd think the public would've learned a very good lesson from that one.

There's a bottom line for me on this and it's quite simple.

The term "national security" gets abused used quite often when justifying military actions. If you look for definitions of "national security", you find that the term has evolved from its simple origin meant to define protection from military threats or political coercion threatening a country's borders. The term apparently has been expanded to include justification for military actions abroad, where threats to the aggressor are unclear, muddled, or nonexistent.

All of this is to say that I fail to understand what we're doing in Syria in the first place. Especially given the fact that bombings in Syria have brought in close, direct conflict with Russia..... something I hope we're all against. Whether or not Syria is gassing its own people shouldn't be the business of the U.S., or any other country, for that matter. We can fret over it.... we can criticize it.... we can condemn it. But bombing the country? It's wrong.

I like that the chap admits that he could be wrong as some of the details are just impossible to know with any certainty. When was the last time you heard the BBC or CNN admit the potential to be wrong or preface a report with 'But we could be wrong'? The mainstream claims to be an authoritative voice, but has been caught out misleading people far too many times now. The narrative simply doesn't work anymore. I don't even bother with the BBC or CNN anymore. They are a waste of time.

[El Kabong]

This missile strike hit ISIS who the US used to help in Syria.

No, it hit the secular government's buildings and a university.

The Syrian government has been fighting ISIS. Assad has been protecting the Syrian Christian population from Sunni extremists like ISIS.

Ever wonder why ISIS never hit Israeli targets? A dog never bites it's own tail.

Terrorists have been known to hide behind innocuous buildings.

I have no doubt that ISIS is connected to other deep state baddies and I would not be surprised if Mossad (aka Israeli Secret Intelligence Services) has bad actors in their group as well.

All I'm saying is that this missile attack was not a huge deal because Russia would retaliate IMMEDIATELY not just sit back and figure out how to respond.

[brocktonblockbust]

The media really hype this up as well and I believe that Trump and Putin are also cashing in a bit on the height just for Ratings. All the air space from the offshore ships to the targets were DECONFLICTED well in advance... Putin had absolutely no problem with it at all.

[Beanz]

The media really hype this up as well and I believe that Trump and Putin are also cashing in a bit on the height just for Ratings. All the air space from the offshore ships to the targets were DECONFLICTED well in advance... Putin had absolutely no problem with it at all.

So are you suggesting that Trump and Putin are in collusion? Or just both lying ..or both playing fake news to hold onto power?

I thought you said Trump was being threatened with assassination? was Putin threatened as well?

Only if there are conspiracies it seems important to you only that neither Trump or Putin are implicated. Does that not seem incredibly unrealistic? If there is a military industrial complex beinfg controlled by a few shadowy figures it is surely preposterous to insist that both Trump and Putin, known for their ruthlessness in business and in politics, would somehow be the victims in this?

It makes no sense at all.

Oh..i forgot.. and now Assad is the third innocent victim.

These are not powerless civilians. These are three men with an awful lot in common.

Is that a coincidence?

[brocktonblockbust]

Those are three figureheads which were elected by sheep. Once the figureheads are elected then the Deep State pulls their strings like marionettes. If they try to fight fact they get assassinated.

[Beanz]

Those are three figureheads which were elected by sheep. Once the figureheads are elected then the Deep State pulls their strings like marionettes. If they try to fight fact they get assassinated.

May, Putin, Trump, Assad. They are not just figureheads. They are not even just in bed with the puppet master, they are pulling the strings to stay in the club. If they are just worried about keeping their own heads then what does that make them?


How do you think they got were they are by being nice people? by being morally sound and acting in the interests of others? because they have a burning desire to serve? Because they want to make a difference in the world or because they crave power and all of it's trappings?

THEY ARE 100% DEEP STATE.

The hardest conspiracies to see are the ones right in front of your face. Hidden in plain sight.